The simple answer is the controversial answer. Life needs something to spark it from nothing to something. That's more evidence of a demiurge than anything else.
If we're just having fun here, then I'd say it doesn't have a creator. Which is not a concept humans are capable of understanding. It could be the demiurge is eternal, forever and always. The concept of time may have been an invention by such a creator.
Sure, but time isn’t necessary for a causal chain. Even if from the perspective of the demigurge it has always existed, in some causal (or anti-causal depending on the laws outside our reality) way it must have spontaneously come in to being (Or, if the demiurge was created from another being, eventually the chain of causation comes back to some being spontaneously coming into existence). You can’t avoid the “something came from nothing” reality, even if what came into being first came into being in a way that from a human perspective seems timeless.
It’s difficult to talk about this when the concept of time is so deeply embedded in our language. To a timeless being (or universe or whatever), there would be no concept of “first”. “Always existed” would only make sense to a time-bound creature, as would a chain of causation. Even to call it a timeless “being” is to use a word that is in some sense chained to time.
The human perspective is not the correct/absolute reference frame.
The Creator must not have "come from nothing". Him always existing as the ultimate entity - even before/outside the existence of time itself - is not difficult a concept for us to grasp.
